Re: [ALSC-Forum] Re: Direct vs. Indirect elections

[Jeff Williams]

Eric and all stakeholders or interested parties,

Eric Dierker wrote:

> Jeff,
>
> I need some help here.  As you know I have been given a ball to run with,
> Outreach/Consensus building.

  Yes on the GA you are.  Keep plugging!  >;)

>
> I do not and cannot also carry the finance ball.  Please run with it. As I was
> told, "we don't need your suggestions at this time we need your actions".

  I would love to do so.  I would of course need in the current ICANN
structure the authority to do so however.  Presently I don't have
that authority either from the ICANN BoD or the DNSO GA.
When and if I have that, I would be happy to do so if there is
proper compensation by which I have a good opportunity to
make it happen.  I await that call and opportunity. So, it is
unfortunate and with some dismay that I must consider
this request one that has no authority nor provides even
the minimum of compensation to achieve any reasonable
goals.  Therefore there is no means by which I can
except this request with all due respect.  I DO appreciate
the thought however. >:)

>  This
> may seem like a strictly GA matter but it is not.

  Very true.

> As this forum will presumably
> be shut down at the time of MDR we need to keep the bottoms up method working and
> there is just one need financially.  Please give it some thought then take action
> and get it done.

  Again no authority or means, I cannot and do not except at this time.

>
>
> As for being upset, I am from birth a southwesterner in the US and very rural to
> boot.  "Dang it" is a phrase we would use when seeing a pretty filly, hearing good
> music or doing somethin right for the first time, it is like saying "we have not
> been getting it until just now and now we know how it should be".  It is just a
> regional thing, I think in Missouri it is just a polite cus word and a good
> preacher would disapprove of its use. I could no more get upset at Joanna than I
> could be pleased with Luis T.
>
> Eric
>
> Jeff Williams wrote:
>
> > Eric, Joanna and all stakeholders or interested parties,
> >
> >   Let us not get all upset Eric.  Joanna's questions is a good one.
> > As the "Outreach" person for the DNSO GA, we are looking to you
> > for some of the help to answer Joanna's question.  We are hoping that
> > through your wonderful efforts that you will be able to grow the
> > awareness for stakeholders that are currently not participating to
> > be able to participate!  How is that coming BTW, Eric?
> >
> >   It is been long true the the ICANN BoD and staff have by in large
> > been lacking in doing much to gain participation by stakeholders.
> > Many have said and believe this is by design.  I am one of those.
> > But we whom are participants must try to help the ICANN BoD
> > and staff in this important endeavor.  We [INEGroup] have only to
> > see that our members and other interested parties thwarted by
> > that same ICANN BoD and staff as is evident on the DNSO GA
> > and Bob Davis and James Touton's permanent banning from participation
> > by Harald Alverstand, now the Chair of the IETF, but at that time
> > was chair of the DNSO GA.  We also now see that the ICANN BoD
> > and staff through it's ALSC wishes to limit the stakeholders to
> > a mere 50k members all of which must be Domain Name holders.
> > That of course is hardly representative as most of us know.
> >
> >   This cannot stand of course!  So Eric, you have a rather large
> > task ahead, and little time to spend here responding to Joanna
> > or anyone else.  Time to get your hushpuppies on and start
> > the door knocking, gaining and growing the awareness of
> > new here to fore non-participating stakeholder of interested
> > parties and gathering funding for the DNSO GA.
> >
> >   A suggestion for you to possibly concentrate on Eric in your
> > task(s).  Begin with working on getting New.net recognized
> > in the BC (Business Constituency) and their customers aware
> > that they too are stakeholders that should be participating.
> > After all most of them are Domain Name holders and I believe
> > on last count there were 16m of them.
> >
> > Eric Dierker wrote:
> >
> > > Dang it Joanna,
> > >
> > > We are working on a project that involves sub locations for internet
> > > connectivity otherwise known as Internet Cafe's.  By the end of next week we
> > > will begin approaching Institutions like the UN to help fund this in and out
> > > reach.  It is really quite difficult to manage and by tuesday we will begin
> > > conferences.  The statistics indicate one billion users through these
> > > channels.
> > >
> > > But as users, or dotcommoners we must be patient.  I want a shoeshine boy
> > > from Kabul to be the first voter.  We will not rest but we shall be patient.
> > > This is why I have hire my able assistant Brooks although we have be
> > > sidetracked as of late.  But we will give a good showl.  As Jeff has said so
> > > well us dotcommoners own this net and we will control it soon.  Take heart
> > > the AL will soon dictate terms.
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > > Eric
> > >
> > > Joanna Lane wrote:
> > >
> > > > I concur. One cannot simply avoid the fact that there are internet
> > > > stakeholders out there who have nothing to do with the Domain Name
> > > > Registration business and will not even be aware that an ALSC exists.
> > > > What is the proposal to reach this group about issues in which they will
> > > > have an interest?
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Joanna
> > > >
> > > > on 10/19/01 11:09 AM, Sandy Harris at sandy@storm.ca wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > L Gallegos wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> This discussion completely ignores those who have email access
> > > > >> only, wihch is a sufficiently large number of people from many
> > > > >> countries, that it must be addressed.
> > > > >
> > > > > Good point. The earlier suggestion of a PGP web of trust would
> > > > > allow those people to vote. No web-based solution does.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think this means that a web-based solution is at most an
> > > > > add-on, something we do for the convenience of certain users,
> > > > > while an email-based method is a requirement.
> > > > >
> > > > >> On 18 Oct 2001, at 13:10, Sandy Harris wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Bruce Young wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>>> Will it scale to the millions of potential voters, many just end
> > > > >>>>> users with limited access to limited machines, and many not
> > > > >>>>> speaking English?
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> So we engineer a client browser plug-in that prompts for language.
> > > > >>>> I imagine if ICANN asked the public, no small number of developers
> > > > >>>> would be willing to donate time to engineer this for us.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Perhaps, but it is not an easy problem, given the variety of
> > > > >>> languages, and browsers, out there. Also, I don't think it is at all
> > > > >>> clear either that many developers would want to donate time for this
> > > > >>> or that we should be asking them to, rather than paying them for any
> > > > >>> work we want done.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On the other hand, many browsers already have multi-language support
> > > > >>> and forms support and SSL/TLS enecryption/authentication security. It
> > > > >>> is not clear we need a plugin, perhaps just a carefully designed set
> > > > >>> of web pages and some translation work.
> >
> > Regards,
> > --
> > Jeffrey A. Williams
> > Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
> > CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
> > Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> > E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> > Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
> > Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208